How will they save?

Don't vote for anyone who won't commit to a serious plan to bolster Oregon's reserves

No state has a more volatile tax system than Oregon's, which relies heavily on the fortunes of the top 2 percent of its income tax payers.

No one has a tax kicker like Oregon's, which requires the state to rebate tax dollars when its economists cannot accurately guess -- two years in advance -- the flow of personal and corporate income tax revenue.

No state needs a large savings account more than Oregon does.

And no one should be elected to state office in November unless they can tell you exactly what they intend to do to build the kind of rainy day fund Oregon needs.

Candidates for governor and the Legislature are now knocking on doors in communities all over the state and asking for support in the Nov. 2 general election. Don't let them get away without extracting some kind of commitment about state savings.

Don't let them get away with saying that all Oregon needs are lawmakers with the guts to cut budgets and save money. Don't let them tell you that it's as simple as reforming the kicker, either.

The fact is, Oregon needs at least two major changes in law to build in the kind of fiscal discipline and financial opportunity that the state requires to create what it needs, which is a rolling savings account of at least $1 billion.

One is a mandatory, fixed percentage of general fund revenue, say 3 percent, that should be required -- except in financial crises like this one -- to flow into a state savings fund. As it is, Oregon does not have a strong statutory requirement for savings, not even in years when the state is flush with money. And if you look back over the last two decades, there were many flush revenue years when lawmakers chose to spend money that should have been saved.

The second is kicker reform. When state economists last week reported to lawmakers that Oregon's floundering economy had blown another $373 million hole in the budget, they also noted that an unexpected rise in business income taxes likely will require the rebate of some $40 million in corporate income taxes next year. In other words, Oregon will be the only state in the union next year to cut a rebate check to Wal-Mart at the same time it cuts its schools and universities. That's crazy.

Moreover, Oregon's projected income tax revenue has plunged $1.2 billion in just the past 12 months, forcing painful budget cuts. It was only three years ago that the state shipped back to taxpayers more than a billion dollars in personal income tax kicker rebates. If that money had instead been saved, Oregon could have ridden through this recession without resorting to ill-timed tax increases on business and the very high-income earners it needs to pull it out of its tailspin -- Measures 66 and 67 -- or shortening its school year and slashing other services.

Most Republican candidates support the 3 percent required savings. Most Democrats are eager to reform the kicker. But again, just one or the other is not the solution. Three percent of revenues in good years alone won't build an adequate reserve fund. Neither will kicker reform.

It's likely that the candidates knocking on your door support only half the solution.